China Task Force Recommendations Focus on Education, New Defense Strategy

June 9, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The Pentagon will overhaul its policy on China after a task force spent 100 days looking at the issue and forming recommendations on how the Defense Department can better compete with Beijing.

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III on June 9 announced DOD efforts to address these challenges, though most of these steps will remain classified. Public initiatives will include using the background of the China Task Force to guide the development of the next National Defense Strategy and a new look at education.

“The efforts I am directing today will improve the department’s ability to revitalize our network of allies and partners, bolster deterrence, and accelerate the development of new operational concepts, emerging capabilities, future force posture, and a modernized civilian and military workforce,” Austin said in a release.

Austin has ordered the under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness to overhaul professional military education to include an increased focus on China.

The move follows a similar Air Force effort. USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., in his “Accelerate Change or Lose” memorandum, called on the service to “develop and build a deep institutional understanding” of China through education and training.

This is taking place largely through Air University, which will have a “heavy flavor” of great power competition and a focus on China, Air Education and Training Command boss Lt. Gen. Marshall B. Webb told Air Force Magazine.

President Joe Biden in February went to the Pentagon to announce the creation of the task force, which included civilian and uniformed members from the Joint Staff, the military services, combatant commands, and intelligence. Biden said there needs to be a whole-of-government effort, including bipartisan support in Congress, to address the increasing competition with Beijing.

“That’s how we’ll meet the China challenge and ensure the American people meet the competition of the future,” Biden said.

Speaking the same day at a virtual Atlantic Council event, USAF Gen. Tod D. Wolters, head of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander-Europe, said NATO too has a “newfound vigilance with respect to China.”

“We will obviously continue to exercise pretty vigilant to those areas. We seek to enforce good order and discipline in international seas, and international airspace …. and with this renewed NATO interest with respect to activities that take place in China, I believe we’re on the right track,” Wolters said.

Air Force One Replacement Delay Could Mean More Maintenance for Existing Planes

June 9, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The existing VC-25As, known as Air Force One when the President is on board, may have to undergo another maintenance cycle, requiring Air Mobility Command to take funding from other requirements, as the replacement program faces a possible schedule delay.

Boeing presented the Air Force with a revised schedule for the production of the VC-25B, which would push back the delivery of the first aircraft by one year to 2025. Darlene Costello, the acting assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, said during a June 9 House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee hearing that the Air Force is reviewing this schedule and will make a decision on it by September.

“Boeing has proposed, or informed, us that they believe they will be about 12 months beyond their original schedule. That doesn’t mean that we agree with that yet,” she said.

The most recent schedule change comes after the company’s supplier, GDC Technics LLC, filed for bankruptcy after Boeing canceled its contracts because of schedule delays. The company in April reported a $318 million pre-tax charge on the program because of this issue and COVID-19 impacts.

Boeing received a $3.9 billion contract in 2018 to build the two jets, but Costello said the company has reached out to the Air Force to negotiate a price adjustment for the program.

Lt. Gen. Brian S. Robinson, deputy commander of Air Mobility Command, said during a June 9 Defense News event that because of the VC-25A’s mission, carrying the President of the United States, the aircraft gets its best support and expertise.

If the VC-25s need to enter another extensive maintenance cycle it would mean AMC would “have to divert resources from other things that we’d like to do to cover any gap that might be there. So, there will be some stresses there, … but if we come to that position to make that decision, we’ll make it in favor of being priority one to support and protect the President of the United States.”

No One Hurt After Possible Shooting at Lackland Gate

June 9, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas, lifted a lockdown on the base Wednesday afternoon, after a shooting was reported at the main gate. No one was injured in the incident, said officials.

The base first announced the lockdown around 12:50 p.m. local time, saying there is a real-world active shooter warning at the installation.

Lt. Col. Brian Loveless, commander of the 802nd Security Forces Squadron at the base, told reporters there was a report of shots fired outside the base’s Valley Hi Gate. Responders did not determine anything “up front” when responding, but security forces and local police are pursuing a “couple of leads to confirm gunshots did take place.”

No witnesses reported seeing a shooting, Loveless said.

Joint Base San Antonio, in an update, said the shooting is suspected to have happened outside the gate, and responders worked with police to “clear the area and search for the shooters.”

Loveless said security forces were pursuing leads of multiple shooters, but that was not confirmed. The Valley Hi gate remained closed hours after the shooting, but the lockdown was lifted for the rest of the base.

Lackland is a major Air Force installation that hosts the service’s basic training. The Joint Base San Antonio complex also includes nearby Kelly Field, Fort Sam Houston, and Randolph Air Force Base.

The active shooter threat comes less than 24 hours after Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam, Hawaii, locked down as officials investigated a possible bomb threat on ship there.

Investigation: Pilot’s Disorientation Caused 2020 Fatal F-16 Crash in Michigan

June 9, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

A Wisconsin Air National Guard pilot experienced spatial disorientation while flying at night, in bad weather, and without working GPS, causing his F-16 to crash in a wooded area of northern Michigan, according to an Air Force Investigation released June 9.

Capt. Durwood “Hawk” Jones, 37, was killed instantly in the Dec. 8, 2020, crash in the Hiawatha National Forest. He was assigned to the 176th Fighter Squadron, 115th Fighter Wing out of Truax Field Air National Guard Base.

Jones and his wingman were scheduled to take part in an aerospace control alert training mission the night of Dec. 8, when the Wisconsin Civil Air Patrol aircraft, expected to serve as the intercept target, canceled because of poor weather near Green Bay.

The two F-16s took off as a two-ship to practice a scramble flight, using a backup instrument profile, relying on the aircraft’s avionics during the night flight. The pilots were also wearing night-vision goggles during the flight.

During the sortie, Jones noticed his GPS was degraded because of the loss of satellite tracking data. He decided to perform an “in-flight alignment” of the aircraft’s inertial navigation system while troubleshooting the GPS problem. While doing this, the two F-16s performed a lead swap, with the wingman taking point.

After switching, Jones continued to try to diagnose the navigation problems and then lost visual contact with the wingman. At one point, the wingman asked Jones if he could see him, and Jones radioed that he was “blind.”

The two pilots established deconfliction “via vertical and horizontal means,” during which Jones apparently became spatially disoriented. His F-16s went into a series of heading, altitude, and attitude changes. The F-16’s nose dropped to 90 degrees low, at 135 degrees of right bank, and at a speed of 600 knots “that terminated with controlled flight into terrain,” according to the report. He did not attempt to eject.

The aircraft was completely destroyed. After losing radio contact, the wingman stayed on scene to start search and rescue. Other USAF and Coast Guard aircraft also participated in the search and local agencies responded to the scene.

Because of the extent of the crash, investigators could not analyze physical evidence from the F-16 and instead relied on interviews, radar data, and radio recordings to determine the cause.

The Air Force Accident Investigation Board report states the cause of the crash was the pilot’s inability to recover from spatial disorientation. The combination of night, weather conditions, the use of night-vision goggles, low illumination, the aircraft’s speed and position, and the pilot’s breakdown in visual scan of the aircraft’s instrumentation impacted his “ability to recognize, confirm, and recover from the unusual attitude created by the spatially disorienting event,” the report states. Additionally, the pilot’s fixation and the degraded GPS satellite tracking system contributed to the crash.

Jones, a native of Albuquerque, New Mexico, joined the Air National Guard in 2011. He had deployed to Japan, South Korea, and Afghanistan, where he received two Air Medals with “C” devices for operating while exposed to hostile action or under significant risk of hostile action.

“We are deeply saddened by this tragic loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with the family during this difficult time,” 115th Fighter Wing Commander Col. Bart Van Roo said in a Dec. 10 release. “Today is a day for mourning. The 115th Fighter Wing and the entire Wisconsin National Guard stands with the pilot’s family as we grieve the loss of a great Airman and patriot.”

USAF Won’t Retire More B-1s Until B-21 On Duty

June 8, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

Editor’s Note: This story was updated at 5:18 p.m. on June 9 to clarify comments Air Force acting acquisition executive Darlene Costello made during a House Armed Services subcommittee on projection forces hearing on June 8. The first two B-21s are “in production,” but are not completely built, according to the Air Force.

The Air Force won’t retire any more B-1 Lancer bombers until the new B-21 Raider joins the fleet, Lt. Gen. David S. Nahom told a House Armed Services panel June 8.

Speaking before a House Armed Services subcommittee on projection forces June 8, Nahom said the 45 remaining B-1s, after the planned 17 are retired, will be kept in service “until these units shake hands with the B-21s as they arrive. We have no intention of going below 45, because the combatant commanders need that firepower in the next five, seven, 10 years, until the B-21s start showing up in the numbers we need them.”

The Air Force had previously suggested there might be further drawdowns of the B-1 as the B-21 neared deployment.

Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.) asked if the combat needs of the Air Force will be met by the new size of the bomber force.

“Flat out, no,” said Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote, deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration, and requirements. “This is why I say, the risk in the bomber portfolio is high. We’ve got to do better. We’ve got to accelerate the B-21 capability as quickly as we can. But in the short term, the answer is no.” The decisions on whether to extend the service life of some bombers and the schedule for the B-21 “were made five, 10, 15 years ago,” under the Budget Control Act, and the decision was made to prioritize readiness over modernization, he said.

When Luria asked if the B-21 can be accelerated, Hinote said, “It’s just true that we can’t get the B-21 fast enough.”

Air Force acting acquisition executive Darlene Costello said the priority for the B-21 is “to get through the design, get completed, and not introduce concurrency” in the program.

“Once we get through design and get the first ones delivered, we can adjust production rates and maybe affect them that way, but we have to get through the engineering with solid discipline,” she said.

Luria expressed surprise that the design is not yet complete, to which Costello replied, “We have the design. There are two test aircraft [being] built and it will take a while to get through all the testing. And therefore, there could be some changes as a result of the testing.”

Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office director and program executive officer for the B-21, Randall G. Walden, told Air Force Magazine late last year that the second B-21 was in production and the first would roll out in early 2022, with flight tests expected to begin in the middle of next year. Walden said the first aircraft would undergo extensive ground tests between rollout and first flight, and the second aircraft would be a ground test vehicle.

Nahom said the combat capability of the 45 B-1s will be at least as good, if not better, than with the 62-airplane fleet.

By reducing the 17 most expensive to maintain and hardest-to-fix aircraft while keeping the same level of maintenance manpower until the B-21 arrives, “we think we can get the readiness level of [the B-1] actually higher,” Nahom said. “We can actually have more airplanes available for the combatant commander in the interim by getting rid of the oldest, most problem-prone aircraft in the fleet. We think that’s paying off,” he said.

The decision was made because the B-1s that are coming out of the inventory “cost more to sustain … than the benefit you get from them.” Nahom added that the Air Force “thought it was going to be more” than 17 aircraft that would be drawn down until a tail-by-tail analysis found the optimum number.

USAF Prepares for Over-the-Horizon Operations After Afghanistan Withdrawal

June 8, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

USAF is prioritizing an enduring presence across the Middle East as the U.S. prepares for “over-the-horizon” operations following the withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Acting Air Force Secretary John P. Roth told members of the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee on June 8 the Air Force’s direct war funding takes a hit in its 2022 budget request, reflecting the ongoing withdrawal from Afghanistan. Roth said funding for “day-to-day operations” decreases about a billion dollars in 2022, though the department still budgeted “about $10 billion” for an “enduring presence” in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility.

“We have a series of air bases, they will stay for the time being, that’s where your over-the-horizon capability will come from,” Roth said.

The Air Force’s enduring and direct war request of $10.07 billion is $2.3 billion less than the 2021 enacted amount. The service, in budget documents, said it is “taking risk in enduring missions, reducing the request amount to align with current assumptions.”

Unlike prior years, the 2022 budget eliminates the “overseas contingency operations” funds, pulling much of that money into the Pentagon’s $715 billion base budget.

Some areas, according to budget documents, where the Air Force is drawing down its spending, include:

A decrease in flying hours, funding just 160,613 total force flying hours in its direct war and enduring costs budget, down from 200,866 in the 2021 enacted budget.
A decrease in the number of Total Force Airmen supporting contingency operations from 22,779 in the 2021 budget to 19,889 in the 2022 request.

Some costs are growing, however. The Air Force is requesting $154.52 million for primary combat forces funding for Operation Freedom’s Sentinel in Afghanistan, up from $108.84 million in 2021 as strike aircraft face longer missions. Continued operations will focus largely on locations such as Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, which is hosting B-52 bombers for long-distance strike operations in Afghanistan.

On June 8, CENTCOM announced that more than 50 percent of the entire retrograde process has been completed, with about 500 C-17 loads of material flown out of the country.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., appearing alongside Roth in the hearing, said the current capabilities in use in CENTCOM will largely remain in the Air Force in 2022, though he acknowledged the service’s priorities are shifting.

“I will tell you we are also making a transition to the future,” Brown said. “So, small levels of that divestment as we start to look towards the future, maintaining the capability that we’ve been using today, at the same time looking forward [to that] capability that will ensure that we are able to be connected, and be persistent, and be supportable, not only in a permissive environment, but in a highly contested environment as well.”

Air Force Eyeing C-130 Replacement Using New Vertical Lift Technology

June 8, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force is looking beyond the venerable C-130 for tactical airlift missions, saying the airplane no longer meets its needs for a future of dispersed operating locations where a runway may not be available.

Under typical questioning from members anxious about continuing C-130 missions for Guard and Reserve units in their districts, service “futurist” Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote told the House Armed Services seapower and projection forces panel the Air Force no longer views the C-130 as “well suited” to the future tactical airlift mission, and it needs to replace it with “new capabilities” involving vertical lift technologies.

“There’s been a lot of discussion about tactical airlift in the future, and I think it’s important for me, as the Air Force’s futurist, to say something about it,” said Hinote, whose title is deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration, and requirements.

In wargaming scenarios with China, and given the Air Force’s plan to island- and location-hop to avoid enemy missiles, “we run significant risk in [tactical] airlift, especially in conducting logistics under attack,” Hinote said. The “C-130 capability is not well-suited to address this risk,” he said. “That’s why we feel we need to retire a certain number of the older C-130s, while addressing this airlift risk in new ways, with new capabilities.”

In scenarios where logistics is under attack by China, Russia, or other adversaries, “what we see is that the capability for vertical lift is going to be really important for us; i.e., getting away from the fixed runway, so that we can do logistics in a way that is somewhat disruptive, and, frankly, a lot harder to target.”

Hinote said there are “quite a few efforts going on” with regard to battlefield vertical lift. The Army is pursuing a number of new rotary-craft programs, which Hinote said the Air Force is “following very closely,” but “at the very same time, we’re exploring vertical lift programs inside of our RDT&E as well.” Hinote did not forecast when the Air Force might start moving toward the new capability with a program of record.

In recent years, contractors have shown a variety of vertical-lift or short takeoff/vertical landing concepts for a future battlefield, from quad-tiltrotors to stealthy tactical transports with lift fans in their wings. Some have also promoted a new generation of airships for the lift mission; all oriented toward a future that weans the Air Force off long runways. Being able to operate from locations with no runway would multiply the locations the Air Force could operate from, thus multiplying the targeting problem for an adversary.

In a nod to the members’ concerns, Hinote said this new capability “may be a very important part of the reserve component, because the idea of vertical lift could also play a huge role in some of the responsibilities that …governors have” for humanitarian and disaster relief.

Lt. Gen. David S. Nahom, deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, told the panel the Air Force sees a near-term C-130 fleet of 255 airframes, which includes “163 C-130Js, either existing or on order, and 92 C-130Hs, which we’ll upgrade to the level we need to. We’ll move forward with that fleet,” he said.

However, he quickly added that “we’ve got to look beyond, in lift, especially tactical lift; we’ve got to look to the future. Because it’s not just C-130s, it’s other things we need to do.”

The Air Force’s vertical-lift portfolio includes the CV-22 tiltrotor, used for special operations missions; HH-60G and HH-60W helicopters, used for combat search and rescue; UH-1N helicopters for VIP transport and missile field support and security; and the new MH-139 Grey Wolf, which will replace the UH-1N.

After Scaled-Back 2021, Air Force Military Construction Gets a Big Bump in ’22 Budget

June 8, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

A year after submitting its smallest military construction and family housing budget in a half-decade, the Department of the Air Force submitted a 2022 budget request that marked a return to years past—and a substantial increase overall.

The 2022 figure of roughly $2.8 billion marks a 75 percent increase from the $1.6 billion enacted in 2021 and is more than double the $1.27 billion requested last year. And based off total dollars, it is the largest year-over-year increase in the military construction and family housing funding requests for the department in more than a decade.

The Air Force officials had previously indicated there would be a “significant” increase from 2021’s figures. On May 19, Brig. Gen. William H. Kale III, deputy chief of staff for logistics, engineering, and force protection, told House appropriators the MILCON and family housing budget would “return to a level similar to funding requests from previous year.”

In fiscal 2020, the department requested $2.68 billion but was appropriated $5.2 billion to aid repairs to bases heavily damaged by natural disasters. In 2019, the amount requested was $2.17 billion, the amount enacted was $2.24 billion. And, in 2018, $2.38 billion was requested and $2.4 billion was enacted.

The increase in funding for 2022 is needed as the department faces a $30 billion backlog in maintenance and repairs, with many of the Air Force’s facilities falling apart as funds for repairs have been limited due to budget constraints.

Yet even with that massive backlog, the department must also modernize its facilities to keep up with new technologies, weapons, and aircraft being introduced.

“It’s almost double from the current level, but a lot of this is stuff that has been expected or long overdue,” said Todd Harrison, director of defense budget analysis and the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “And in particular, just thumbing through the MILCON, about $1.4 billion of it is for what they classify as new construction and facilities, so it’s not keeping up with current facilities, rehabbing them, or anything like that. It’s for new missions that need to be supported.”

Kale said May 19 that the budget would prioritize modernizing the infrastructure needed to support the new Ground Based Strategic Deterrent and the B-21 Raider bomber programs. Indeed, a full $431 million in the 2022 budget is directed towards facilities for the GBSD and B-21.

The B-21 program in particular would be supported by $333 million in funds, all at Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota, for facilities to house and repair the aircraft, as well as simulators and training buildings for crew members. Other beddown costs include $98 million for the GBSD program, $67 million at Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, and the rest at Hill Air Force Base, Utah.

Other new programs are also supported by tens of millions of dollars requested for needed infrastructure. There is $160 million dedicated to building a three-bay depot maintenance hangar for the KC-46 at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, and another $160 million spread across five different construction projects all related to the F-35. There is also $20 million directed for F-16 beddown costs, as well as $11 million for the C-130.

Beddown Projects Funded in 2022 MILCON Request

Fiscal 2022 Beddown Projects	FY 22 PB Request
Beddowns
B-21 (Air Force)—6 projects	$333 million
KC-46 (Air Force)—1 project	$160 million
F-35A (Air Force)—4 projects	$129 million
F-35A (Air National Guard)—1 project	$31 million
F-16 (Air National Guard)—2 projects	$20 million
C-130 (Air National Guard)—1 project	$11 million
Nuclear
GBSD (Air Force)—3 projects	$98 million

Source: Department of the Air Force budget documents

Kale said one of the department’s other top priorities for the MILCON budget was supporting combatant commanders’ requirements, especially in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. And in the 2022 budget, there is $730 million requested for facilities outside the U.S., including $349 million in Japan alone. Nearly half of those funds in Japan would go towards constructing a Helicopter Rescue Operations Maintenance Hangar at Kadena Air Base.

“That’s an example of something that is a bill you’re eventually going to have to pay,” Harrison said. “In terms of thinking about how to deter China, though, it is a bit questionable whether or not you want to be doubling down on bases in Japan, because they’re very much within the threat ring, and in an actual confrontation with China, you really need to have bases in the region, [that] are just outside that threat ring.”

In Europe, the 2022 budget includes $264 million in appropriations requests, including $174 million in the U.K.—$80 million would go towards new facilities for F-35As, while $94 million would be for a storage facility in support of the European Deterrence Initiative.

But even if the 2022 budget does feature a return to the funding levels of years prior, a significant backlog of repairs will still weigh on the department.

“Really going on about a decade, we’ve been short-changing MILCON,” Harrison said. “And they’ve been doing that just because of budget pressures, that there are other pressing areas within the Air Force and DOD’s overall budget that at the end of the day, some of these maintenance items are things that can be deferred. But you can’t defer them indefinitely.”

How President Joe Biden’s administration and the Pentagon hope to address that issue remains to be seen, but Harrison did mark a certain emphasis in the budget documents he reviewed.

“It seems like their language in talking about MILCON has shifted to use the word infrastructure a lot more,” Harrison said. “And I can’t help but wonder if that is a reflection of the priorities of the administration, that they want to be seen as focusing on infrastructure.” Biden has proposed a $2 trillion infrastructure plan for the general public, and Harrison noted that some of those funds could go towards military construction if the projects are considered infrastructure.

Crew Ordered to Crash MQ-9 in Africa in June 2020 After ‘Catastrophic’ Fuel Leak

June 8, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

An MQ-9 suffered a catastrophic fuel leak while flying in an undisclosed area of Africa, prompting the crew to crash the Reaper as hard as possible into the ground to avoid a successful recovery of the aircraft, according to an Air Force investigation released June 4.

The MQ-9, tail number 08-4051, assigned to the 162nd Wing of the Arizona Air National Guard and operated by the 214th Attack Squadron Mission Control Element at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, was flying a mission in support of U.S. Africa Command, though the Accident Investigation Board report does not provide details on the mission or location.

During the flight, the ground control station began to display warnings that fuel was low, and the aircraft’s crew started looking for the issue so they could clear the fault. The crew found the fuel level was “well short” of expected levels, and the pilot asked the mission crew commander to help.

The sensor operator used the aircraft’s main camera to sweep the aircraft, and discovered it was “severely leaking fuel from the fuselage,” the report states.

About 43 minutes after first discovering the issue, the MQ-9 began to return to base at maximum speed, but the crew realized “the fuel leak was catastrophic” and the Reaper couldn’t make it.

The Combined Air Operations Center directed the commander and pilot to “crash the aircraft, and to do so in a way that would minimize chances of a successful recovery effort,” the report states. With fuel exhausted, the pilot “controlled the glide of the aircraft to optimize the impact point” while increasing speed.

According to the investigation, the aircraft was destroyed at a loss of $11.29 million. It was lost in an undisclosed location and not recovered.

The investigation found that the cause of the crash was the fuel leak from the Forward Electric Fuel Heater. Additionally, the investigation found maintainers did not completed a time compliant technical order to fix a known MQ-9 deficiency with the fuel system, the design of the aircraft’s fuel detection system, and a lack of guidance and tolerances for the fuel system contributed to the mishap.